Rogue traders hit Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch
LONDON - Investment bank Morgan Stanley has suspended a suspected rogue trader who reportedly cost the bank $120 million (£60 million) by overpricing investments. Matthew Piper, a middle ranking credit trader working at the bank's London offices, was suspended a month ago and the incident has been reported to the UK Financial Services Authority. The news comes after rival US bank Merrill Lynch launched a separate investigation, probing the activities of one of its London-based equity derivatives traders on suspicion of inflating mark prices on single stock derivatives.
Merrill Lynch said its risk management system caught the suspicious trades, said to have taken place in April, while Morgan Stanley has clearly been less fortunate. The bank said it discovered the suspicious investments in the second half of May and believes that they had gone undetected for at least three months. It has disclosed a $120 million "negative adjustment" related to overstated valuations on some of the trader's positions. There are key similarities between the two cases. Both involved the repricing of difficult-to-value investments using mark-to-market models reliant upon highly illiquid markets.
These fresh trading incidents follow January's rogue trading scandal at Societe Generale and another investigation at Swiss bank Credit Suisse. Morgan Stanley's chief financial officer, Colm Kelleher, said the bank had "zero tolerance" of such behaviour.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Double, but no trouble? CVA capital hit may lack clout
Industry opinion mixed around Basel III endgame derivatives charge
Amid debanking drama, banks try to say ‘no’, safely
A basic risk management tool – the ability to turn a customer away – has become a political football
Erba myth: will US banks choose new capital measure?
B3E gives US banks a dilemma – adopt expanded risk-based approach, or a new standardised alternative
Illiquid assets pricing still needs expert judgement, say banks
EU regulators want more transparency in valuations, but some asset prices remain elusive
Fed to move tailored-capital goalposts soon, says Bowman
Banks hope agencies will index triggers for harsher capital rules to economic growth
Will SEC reporting proposal supercharge alt data providers?
Move that would allow companies to opt out of quarterly reporting disclosures welcomed
EU lawmaker calls for review of Luxembourg’s cross-border rules
Grand Duchy accused of side-stepping rules aimed at prising away banking business from London
Un-American or un-JPM? Surcharge rethink divides G-Sibs
Some see sense in rethink to funding indicator, others call for a backtrack